spot_img
27.6 C
Philippines
Friday, March 29, 2024

Absurd reactions to the ICC issue

- Advertisement -

While everyone has the right to comment on public issues, the government should not be faulted
for sending to the trash bin such absurd comments on serious matters involving international law

The on-going controversy involving the insistence of the International Criminal Court to investigate the anti-drug war maintained by the Philippine government during the administration of then President Rodrigo Duterte has triggered many absurd reactions from some public officials and from the public.

The ICC wants to conduct its investigation on Philippine territory, but the Philippine government politely refuses to allow any such investigation to take place inside Philippine territory.

Explaining that refusal, Justice Secretary Jesus Crispin Remulla points out the Philippines has already withdrawn from the Rome Statute, the international treaty creating the ICC.

Accordingly, Manila may rightfully refuse to cooperate with the ICC, and reject any attempt by the ICC to conduct any investigation within Philippine territory.

In short, the Philippines has the inherent right to oppose any foreign overture that violates Philippine sovereignty.

- Advertisement -

Remulla also pointed out that under the Rome Statute, the ICC may conduct an investigation in a country only if the justice system in that country is a failure.

The justice system in the Philippines, Remulla stressed, is functioning efficiently, which means the ICC has no jurisdiction to investigate in the Philippines even if Manila did not withdraw from the Rome Statute.

Even the Supreme Court dismissed a petition which challenged the constitutionality of Manila’s withdrawal from the Rome Statute without the concurrence of the Senate.

In fine, there is no legal impediment either in international law or under Philippine law against the withdrawal of the Philippines from the Rome Statute, and the refusal of the country to allow the ICC to conduct any investigation in Philippine territory.

Recently, Solicitor General Menardo Guevarra suggested a local commission be created to investigate the drug war of the Duterte administration.

That way, Guevarra said, the ICC will be convinced that the justice system in the Philippines works and that, accordingly, the ICC need not enter the picture.

Remulla disagrees with Guevarra’s proposal.

The justice secretary maintains that any anomaly that may have occurred during the anti-narcotics war of the Duterte administration can be readily taken up under the current justice system obtaining in the Philippines.

Remulla is right.

Moreover, adopting Guevarra’s suggestion is tantamount to indirectly accepting the ICC’s jurisdiction over the Philippines which the ICC has effectively lost by reason of Manila’s withdrawal from the Rome Statute.

In addition, the Philippines should never create an investigating body solely for the purpose of satisfying an international agency’s illegal attempt to override Philippine sovereignty.

At the end of the day, the manner by which the Philippine government enforces Philippine law is none of the ICC’s business, because the Philippines has withdrawn from the Rome Statute, and because the existing justice system in the Philippines is functioning efficiently.

That notwithstanding, Guevarra recently submitted a formal request to the ICC, praying that the ICC stop its investigation of ex-President Duterte’s anti-drug war. Naturally, the ICC denied the appeal.

Considering the manifest desire of the ICC to impose itself against Philippine sovereignty, did Guevarra really expect the ICC to grant the appeal?

Surprisingly, Guevarra filed an appeal asking the ICC to reconsider its rejection of his earlier request. Does Guevarra also expect the ICC to reconsider its ruling?

Like his suggestion of creating a commission, Guevarra’s overtures to the ICC may have the effect of vesting jurisdiction on the ICC which the latter does not have to begin with, in view of the country’s withdrawal from the Rome Statute.

The Office of the Solicitor General operates under the Department of Justice.

Thus, Remulla should demand an explanation from Guevarra for his legally unsound reactions to the ICC controversy, and prevent further damage to the official position of the Philippines on this issue.

(Editor’s Note: The Office of the Solicitor General is an independent and autonomous office attached to the Department of Justice. Although the OSG is attached to the DOJ, the OSG is not a constituent unit of the DOJ. The DOJ’s authority, control and supervision over the OSG are limited only to budgetary purposes.)

Weeks ago, a morning news program broadcast on the ANC News Channel aired several online comments from its viewers regarding the refusal of the Philippines to allow the ICC to conduct its investigation in Philippine territory.

The bulk of the comments argue if the Philippine government has nothing to hide, it should not be afraid of the ICC investigation.

Those comments are non sequitur made by persons who do not understand the law.

Even if one has nothing to hide from investigators, it does not necessarily follow that one should consent to an investigation in the first place!

If the simpletons who made those silly comments were to have their way, everyone in the Philippines, particularly those with nothing to hide, should automatically consent to any search of their persons, houses, papers and effects precisely because they have nothing to hide.

That absurdity violates the constitutional right against unreasonable searches and seizures.

While everyone has the right to comment on public issues, the government should not be faulted for sending to the trash bin such absurd comments on serious matters involving international law.

- Advertisement -

LATEST NEWS

Popular Articles